Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00357
Original file (ND03-00357.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

ex-AR, USNR
Docket No. ND03-00357

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20021223. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20031229. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/PHYSICAL DISABILITY – ENTITLED TO SEVERANCE PAY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620270.


PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated
Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “I recently decided to pursue a life long dream of becoming a police officer.

Upon completion some of the application for the police dept’s, I realized that in order to be considered at certain police departments you must have an “honorable” discharge.

I was discharged “under honorable conditions” (general). There were 2 incidents that required me to be sent to Captain Mast.

The 1 st incident I hold myself completely accountable for my actions. I was young and immature and did not think the situation through.

The 2 nd incident was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in 26 months of service with no other adverse action.

Almost 11 years later I have led a life free of incidents with the law and authority figures. I am currently married (10 years) with 2 children and would like to pursue a career in law enforcement, so that I can have a solid foundation for my family.”

2. “There is also a conflict on my DD214, Line number 24 – Character of service reads “Under Honorable Conditions (general)” and line 28 – Narrative reason for separation reads “Physical disability – entitled to severance pay”.

Attached is a letter of reference from a former employer vouching for my character and job performance.

A copy of the DD214 – member copy 4, is attached for your convenience.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Character Reference letter, undtd, from C_ P_ (former employer)

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Inactive: None
         Active: None

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 900725               Date of Discharge: 920818

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 00 24
         Inactive: 00 00 02

 Age at Entry: 39                          Years Contracted: 8

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 43

 Highest Rate: AA

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Performance: 2.9 (2)     Behavior: 2.7 (2)                 OTA: 2.8

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Battle “E” Ribbon, NDSM, SSDM, SWAS (w/Bronze Star), NUC

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: None

 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/PHYSICAL DISABILITY – ENTITLED TO SEVERANCE PAY, authority: NAVMILPERSMAN, Article 3620270.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

900727:  Commenced 24 months active duty under the Airman Apprenticeship Program.

901015:  Retention Warning: Advised of deficiency (failed to disclose pre-service civil involvement – member charged with two speeding tickets Miami, FL, paid a fine of $180.00 June 88 and Dec 89), notified of corrective actions and assistance available, advised of consequences of further deficiencies, and issued discharge warning.    

910813:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 121: Larceny of two Nintendo game cartridges, military property, or a value of about $46.98 ($27.99 and $18.99), the property of Navy Exchange.
         Award: Forfeiture of $250 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days, reduction to E-1. No indication of appeal in the record.
920116:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 91: Disrespect in language and deportment to a petty officer on 91DEC17, to wit: “Shut your mouth N_, grow up little boy, and F---, I had enough trouble with your wife at home,” or words to that effect.
         Award: Forfeiture of $100 per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 30 days. No indication of appeal in the record.
920414:  Medical Board, Naval Hospital, San Diego: Found Applicant not physical qualified with diagnosis:
Primary: 8442 Left knee anterior/posterior cruciate ligament deficiency, Second: 8360 – Medial meniscal tear left knee;
Third: 8361 – Lateral meniscal tear.
                   Recommendation: Refer to Physical Evaluation Board.

 920710:  Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) notified Chief of Naval Personnel (CNP) that the Applicant was found to be physically unfit to perform duties with a 10% disability, and directed separation with severance pay.
920805:  BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge by reason of physical disability – entitled to severance pay. Applicant received $3142.80 in severance pay.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 920818 under honorable conditions (general) by reason of physical disability – entitled to severance pay (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (B). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).

Issue 1. There is no law or regulation, which provides that a discharge may be upgraded, based solely for the purposes of obtaining better employment. The Applicant acknowledged that some of his problems in the Navy can be attributed to his "youth and immaturity". The evidence of record did not show that the Applicant was either not responsible for his conduct or that he should not be held accountable for his actions. Relief denied.

Issue 2. The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, will change the reason for discharge if such a change is warranted. The applicant's DD Form 214, Blocks 24 and 28, Character of Service and Separation Code, properly reflects his performance while serving in the Navy. Characterization of service for discharges due to physical disability should be “type warranted by the service record.” The Applicant’s service record was marred by award of two non-judicial punishments for larceny and disrespectful language. An upgrade of the Applicant's discharge to an honorable characterization is not warranted. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the edification of the Applicant. There is no law or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded, based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving naval service. The NDRB is authorized, however, to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review. Examples of documentation that should be provided to the Board include proof of educational pursuits, verifiable employment records, documentation of community service, certification of non-involvement with civil authorities, and credible evidence of a substance free lifestyle. At this time, the Applicant has not provided sufficient documentation for the Board to consider.

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide additional documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. The Naval Military Personnel Manual, (NAVPERS 15560C), effective 15 Aug 91 until 04 Mar 93, Article 3620270, SEPARATION OF ENLISTED PERSONNEL ON ACTIVE DUTY (INCLUDING ACTIVE DUTY FOR TRAINING) BY REASON OF
PHYSICAL DISABILITY.

B. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT
If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at " afls14.jag.af.mil ".

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00610

    Original file (ND99-00610.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Decision A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000121. Days of Unauthorized Absence: 58 Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/PHYSICAL DISABILITY, ENTITLED TO SEVERANCE PAY, authority: MILPERSMAN, Article 3620270. 900628: Physical evaluation Board directs the applicant's discharge by reason of physical disability, entitled to severance pay.900815: CNMPC message sent to command...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00091

    Original file (ND01-00091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation Only the applicant's service and medical records were reviewed, as the applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board to consider. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).The applicant’s first issue states: “My discharge was a honorable conditions general discharge and I was told when I was discharged that I would be able...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00573

    Original file (ND99-00573.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 13 pages of Medical Board documentation (including separation physical exam) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USNR (DEP) 900316 - 900321 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900322 Date of Discharge: 970822 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-01079

    Original file (ND00-01079.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 991124 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) due to physical disability (A). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).In response to the applicant’s issues, the Board found that the applicant received an entry level separation because he had...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00784

    Original file (ND00-00784.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The representative did not respond to the Board's inquiry concerning applicant's application and did not submit additional issues for the Board to address. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 981231 with an uncharacterized service (entry level separation) by reason of physical disability, with severance pay (A). In response to the applicant’s issue 1, the applicant was properly discharged for a disability, with severance...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01211

    Original file (ND03-01211.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Applicant Cover letter for supporting documents 31 pages from Applicant’s service record 18 pages from Applicant’s medical record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2000_Navy | ND00-00902

    Original file (ND00-00902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Only a person separated on or after 1 October 1982 while in a entry level status may request for review from an applicant who does not have an Honorable Discharge shall be treated as a request for a change to an Honorable Discharge unless he applicant requests a specific change to another character of discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 990819 with an uncharacterized (entry level separation) discharge due to...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00224

    Original file (ND03-00224.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND03-00224 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 20021121, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 921224: BUPERS directed the Applicant's discharge by reason of physical disability existing prior to entry on active duty established by physical evaluation board proceedings. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19930119 under honorable conditions...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00418

    Original file (MD01-00418.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD01-00418 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010213, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. Doc 1 provides just one example of the treatment I recvd form the command regarding my medical issues. However, the NDRB is authorized to consider outstanding post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01390

    Original file (ND03-01390.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Medical Board recommended the case be referred to the Central Physical Evaluation Board and the Applicant be discharged from active military service. 960426: Applicant accepted finding of the Medical Board.960718: President, Physical Evaluation Board found Applicant unfit to perform duties because of a physical condition, which existed prior to entry and requested the Chief of Naval Personnel effect the discharge. As there are no marks found in the Applicant’s service record, the evidence...